Benchslaps, Federal Government

Benchslap Unloads On District Judge For History Of Screwing Up Trials

The appeals court is getting sick and tired of benchslapping this judge.

By  
on

BenchslapIt seems as though the Fourth Circuit might be a little frustrated with Judge Robert G. Doumar.

In an opinion handed down on Thursday, the Circuit lambasted the octogenarian senior judge for cantankerous trial antics and a flat refusal to figure out the basics of federal sentencing. The not-so-veiled irritation of Judge Stephanie Thacker’s opinion apparently wasn’t enough for Judge James Wynn, who filed a concurrence to drill home his admonitions.

It all started when Judge Doumar presided over the mail and wire fraud conviction of one Jeffrey Martinovich, who appealed “alleging a litany of errors.” Take it away:

Here, we are once again confronted with a case replete with the district court’s ill-advised comments and interference.

Oof. Lest you think the opinion lets its “once again” shade speak for itself, it includes a footnote string-citing Judge Doumar’s history of error.

See, e.g., United States v. Cherry, 720 F.3d 161, 167-69 (4th Cir. 2013); United States v. Echlin, 528 F. App’x 357, 363 (4th Cir. 2013); United States v. Garries, 452 F. App’x 304, 309-11 (4th Cir. 2011) (per curiam); Murphy v. United States, 383 F. App’x 326, 334 (4th Cir. 2010) (per curiam); United States v. Dabney, 71 F. App’x 207, 210 (4th Cir. 2003) (per curium).

It’s hard to say which is more brutal: employing the “see, e.g.” signal or the fact that the footnote breaks across two pages. Someone put in four representative cases and then said, “I know this is going to drag onto the next page, but throw in Dabney too.” That’s cold. I mean, it’s a harsh benchslapping to lay on a federal judge, but what else could they do? They already seem to have thrown out a shoulder benchslapping him silly over the years.

Sponsored

After detailing multiple instances of Judge Doumar’s running commentary on the case — from harassing counsel to unilaterally cutting off questioning — the Fourth Circuit dubbed the comments broad, “imprudent and poorly conveyed.” Ouch. Thankfully for the government, the defendant never raised these objections at trial. But one of Judge Doumar’s errors was such a doozy the court had no option but to swat him down:

“This hearing here is a great example of the problems that — or the difference between the non-guidelines and the guidelines. The non-guidelines were discretionary sentencing depending upon the person and the commission of the offense. Now it doesn’t make any difference who the person is. It doesn’t make any difference. It’s all where do you fit.”

Hm. It seems Judge Doumar missed out on that Booker decision. In his defense, he does elsewhere acknowledge that the Guidelines may not be mandatory, but then…

“I will follow the guidelines only because I have to. I find that they’re not discretionary, they’re mandatory, although people think they’re discretionary and although the courts have said they’re only advisory. But if you don’t follow them you have to give so many reasons why you don’t follow them. It’s tough. It really is tough.”

Really? Oh my, poor baby! It’s just so very difficult to not rubber-stamp a sentence. Why is the process of putting someone in jail so hard?!?

Sponsored

How is that for irony? He’s getting overturned precisely because he compromised his duty due to a fear of being overturned! I can’t tell what’s more embarrassing: that he’s so vocal about his fear of being overturned or that he doesn’t understand what will actually get him overturned?

In any event, tossing Martinovich in the pokey based on a mandatory sentence, despite the bevy of defense arguments to the contrary, brought the case into that ever-eroding conceptual category of “S**t Courts Won’t Call ‘Harmless'” and earned Martinovich a new sentencing in front of a different judge.

This is the problem with senior status. Not that judges get too old to do the job, but that some judges stick around earning that paycheck even after they’ve lost the hunger to do the difficult jobs required of a federal judge. Active judges can bolt for private practice if they lose the edge, but if it strikes a senior judge they’re likely to just keep trucking with their foot off the gas.

Look, it’s a bad day for Judge Doumar. These things happen (again and again to him). Oh well, maybe he can salve his wounds with an ice cream cone — a tasty treat that his uncle actually invented.

Seriously?!?

(As always, behold the complete benchslap on the next page…)

1 2Next »

Topics

, , , , , , , , , , , ,